PLANETARY ANNIHILATION COMMUNITY ACTIVATE

Even "astroids"?

.

Is the IGN wiki supposed to be a serious wiki?
Because reading this it feels like reading a satire on both PA and wiki's in general.

IGN Wiki PA on planets

http://prntscr.com/4emlvj Well **** you too then.

[RLM]Posidian is free <3

Obvious. some form of seamless automatic update to an online UnitDB, preferably on that site

haha shameless plug xD !

I am shameless, Tatsu, you know that besides, he's already a member so it's not like I'm recruiting

You should just beat out the official sites. I know you can I might even know how from my old SEO training heheheh

I went in to fix a typo and accidentally spent hours tweaking things. I should stay the hell away from wikis.

if the wiki is editable by the public I feel like there will be a constant war over that name. Also, to share my stance, I still believe in calling the T1 tank the Ant

Sorry, but IGN fails to meet the 3rd and 4rd requirement.

And that is usability (crippled by the ridiculous amounts of unrelated garbage on the page), and the support for structured data (simply not present in the IGN Wiki since there is nothing similar to http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Semantic_MediaWiki installed).

Also note that it would be very much preferable if the "official" wiki would at least be reachable under an Uber hosted domain and not some 3rd party.

E.g. have a look at the official Guild Wars wikis to see how it can be done properly....

I did SEO for a year at one of my previous jobs and do it a lot for my current job.

Loving this. http://www.ign.com/wikis/planetary-annihilation/Easter_Eggs_and_Secrets

Did you know we had two other random pieces of CSG? I know you guys have found at least one of them.

You mean the temple in the jungle biome and the ruins in the desert biome? They never show up because they aren't included in the JSON files....

Besides, IGN wiki still remains a bad choice.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I personally prefer most wikis to be based off of the mediawiki standard. It is to me, the most accessible and readable. Wiki's with links that are huge images tend to be incredibly unreadable, especially on smaller devices.

IGN does not appear to be particularly messy to me. It's a solid site, though our game information is still obviously being fleshed out.

My one gripe with the IGN site is the copious use of Flash. So many browser freezes today.

HOW DO YOU MESS UP A TEXT EDITOR IGN? HOW DO YOU MAKE SOMETHING THIS AWFUL?

Stock media wiki is fine for a pure knowledge database for mostly unstructured data. But it lacks support for structured data, which you have quite a lot from in PA. (e.g. all the unit stats!)

Thats the reason why most wikis related to more complex games choose at least the https://semantic-mediawiki.org/ extension for media wiki which allows to extend articles by structured data which can be queried for automated generation of comparison tables and alike.

Not a chance of getting this comfort in the IGN wiki.

Whether you are using textlinks or images is a purely cosmetic decision, and certainly not what I was referring to when I mentioned the GW wikis.

Why not just have the wiki link to http://pa-db.com/ for stats?

Somewhat defeats the intention of having a central knowledge base, doesn't it? Also pa-db lacks support for unstructured data, like recommendations on usage or advantages / disadvantages and alike.

They actually are in the JSON. I've seen the ruins on occasion. I only saw the jungle temple once while terrain hacking, so it appears to have very unlikely conditions on it.